On June 8, we the People of Portland have the opportunity to move beyond the personalities that have shaped our politics in recent years and focus on the future.

As a candidate for an at-large seat on the Charter Commission, I hope that, through the charter review process, we as a city can have constructive and critical conversations about how Portland can better reflect our diversity, our values and our hopes and dreams.

Portland is experiencing growing pains. Many of those who I have talked to while knocking on doors have alluded to the idea that Portland is changing, for better or for worse. With all of this growth and change, and the impacts it has on housing affordability, homelessness and sustainable and equitable development, the question arises: Will the structure of Portland’s municipal government adapt, change and modernize accordingly?

I hope the answer is a resounding “yes.” But it is how we get to “yes” that matters.

That is why the manner in which we approach the charter review process matters just as much as what the commission ultimately recommends to the voters. Think of it as quality control.

I consider democracy to be a dialogue, an ongoing conversation that we, as participants, engage in collectively. In a local sense, I view the charter review process as a pause in that conversation. It is a chance for us to collectively take a deep breath, relax, reframe the discussion and adjust the rules of engagement. Indeed, Portland has had many of these throughout its history.

As Portlanders begin to cast their votes for a new Charter Commission, I hope that they give due consideration to the makeup of the commission as they rank their choices.

As the co-chair of the last Charter Commission stated eloquently in her recent letter to the editor, it is imperative that we have diverse voices and perspectives at the table. That alone will help protect the review process from becoming an echo chamber and make it more inclusive and representative of people from all walks of life and different backgrounds.

While the kind of destructive political conflicts that we have seen in Portland politics over the years should be left out of the charter review process, there are constructive conflicts that occur naturally in a room where there are differing worldviews, ideas and approaches to the challenges we face.

That natural friction, if managed well and with maturity, will improve the charter review process because it will expose commissioners to other viewpoints and opinions and push them to think creatively and innovate.

My friend and District 1 candidate Shay Stewart-Bouley put it best when she wrote in her recent column that “commissioners will need to work across differences and reach consensus to create recommendations and revisions that will ultimately benefit all Portland residents.”

Despite its being an elected body, the Charter Commission is no ordinary political or legislative body. It is no place for politics as usual.

I hope that the charter review process will be approached thoughtfully and with much consideration for the impacts it will have on all Portlanders, not just a select few or those of a particular political persuasion. While I have put forth some of my ideas on how we can improve City Hall, I go into this knowing that I will be one person among 11 other commissioners, each with their own ideas and contributions.

If elected as an at-large charter commissioner, I look forward to working with my fellow commissioners to do the hard work of leading a citywide conversation on how the city charter and our municipal government can best represent and reflect the city of Portland.

« Previous

Sen. Pouliot: Feeding all Maine kids in our schools will make the most of our tax dollars

Next »

Leonard Pitts: Where Black history is concerned, America specializes in not knowing